Author 
Message 
DOLLS (J) [!]
ZNES Developer
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:22 pm Posts: 215

We all know that 0 => 1.

Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:22 am 


Panzer88
Inmate
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:28 am Posts: 1485 Location: Salem, Oregon

humility is more impressive than lame excuses Franky.
_________________

Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:29 am 


juliobbv
New Member
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:44 am Posts: 4 Location: San Francisco del Rincón, Gto., México

Substituting one x with one answer while the other one is still expecting two is a bad, bad idea .
Grinvader, I hope that's the correct way to express the answer, I did the steps with x²  x = 0 and it's far more obvious to see the error.
_________________ I'm not a native English speaker. If you have any problems understanding my post, please let me know.

Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:17 am 


Neo Kaiser
Veteran
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 3:56 am Posts: 844

fun^10 x int^40 = Ir2
the end:
_________________ Yes I know that my grammar sucks!

Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:40 pm 


grinvader
ZSNES Shake Shake Prinny
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 4:15 pm Posts: 5621 Location: PAL50, dood !

Why ? I just divide left and right by x, which is valid since it's not 0.
juliobbv covered the main issue.
x²+x+1 = 0 has 2 roots, none of them being 1. [ they are (1±i*sqrt(3))/2, for those who suck ]
Since the steps are legal, these roots are also answers to x=11/x.
Subtituting partially and forgetting where we come from is the fault. To be correct, you should now have a system of equations with:
x²1/x=0 AND x=11/x
The new equation, alone, is not equivalent to the old one, and introduces the third root [1], but still keeps the previous roots. So saying x³=1 <=> x=1 is also flawed in itself.
_________________ 皆黙って俺について来い！！
Pantheon: Gideon Zhi  CaitSith2  Nach  kode54

Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:09 pm 


ZH/Franky

    grinvader wrote: I found my favourite one. It is much more subtle. No dividing by zero bullshit. No sir. It's actually interesting to find where it fucks up. x²+x+1 = 0 x² = x1 Now we set x != 0 x=11/x Substitute that in the first equation... x²  1  1/x +1 = 0 x²  1/x = 0 x² = 1/x x³ = 1 x = 1 != 0, ok... Substitute that in the first equation again... 1² + 1 + 1 = 0 3 = 0 Have fun suckers     
Well, I was tired yesterday night when I tried to find the error (hence the stupid mistakes I made).
I looked at it again for about 30 seconds and it's obvious now:
"x²+x+1 = 0" (your first equation) is false for any value of X, thus invalidating all of your other equations aswell.
Even finding the roots (you FUCKER, grinvader, you made me use imaginary numbers) did not help. The root are...
x = 1 + (((10j) ^ 0.5) / 2) and
x = 1  (((10j) ^ 0.5) / 2)
I believe. Am I correct?
EDIT:
!! Yes, that's it. You are using imaginary numbers. That's the error.

Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:45 pm 


Sferics
Regular
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:48 am Posts: 201

    Franky wrote:     grinvader wrote: I found my favourite one. It is much more subtle. No dividing by zero bullshit. No sir. It's actually interesting to find where it fucks up. x²+x+1 = 0 x² = x1 Now we set x != 0 x=11/x Substitute that in the first equation... x²  1  1/x +1 = 0 x²  1/x = 0 x² = 1/x x³ = 1 x = 1 != 0, ok... Substitute that in the first equation again... 1² + 1 + 1 = 0 3 = 0 Have fun suckers     
Well, I was tired yesterday night when I tried to find the error (hence the stupid mistakes I made). I looked at it again for about 30 seconds and it's obvious now: "x²+x+1 = 0" (your first equation) is false for any value of X, thus invalidating all of your other equations aswell. Even finding the roots (you FUCKER, grinvader, you made me use imaginary numbers) did not help. The root are... x = 1 + (((10j) ^ 0.5) / 2) and x = 1  (((10j) ^ 0.5) / 2) I believe. Am I correct? EDIT: !! Yes, that's it. You are using imaginary numbers. That's the error.     
Firstly, you posted your "solution" nearly 3 hours after he posted. Even longer if you count that other guy's post.
Secondly, you pretty much missed the point of grinvader's solution.
_________________ David Dunham  "Efficiency is intelligent laziness"

Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:57 am 


badinsults
"Your thread will be crushed."
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 1:49 am Posts: 1234 Location: Not in Winnipeg

Imaginary numbers are both fun and useful. I use them daily in my work.
_________________ <pagefault> i'd break up with my wife if she said FF8 was awesome

Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:08 am 


DOLLS (J) [!]
ZNES Developer
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:22 pm Posts: 215

The roots are actually complex, Franky.

Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:02 am 


ZH/Franky

Hey, complex numbers, immaginary numbers. Well, maybe I did get the terminology slightly wrong, but you know what I meant.

Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:46 am 


creaothceann
Seen it all
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 5:04 pm Posts: 2302 Location: Germany

?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
_________________ vSNES  Delphi 10 BPLs bsnes launcher with recent files list
Last edited by creaothceann on Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:24 pm 


grinvader
ZSNES Shake Shake Prinny
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 4:15 pm Posts: 5621 Location: PAL50, dood !

Wrong. As any other quadratic polynomial, it has 2 roots. Wrong again. I already wrote what they are in my previous post. You could use some work on that stuff.
Nope. That's irrelevant.
_________________ 皆黙って俺について来い！！
Pantheon: Gideon Zhi  CaitSith2  Nach  kode54

Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:47 pm 


DOLLS (J) [!]
ZNES Developer
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:22 pm Posts: 215

It's not just the terminonolgy, imaginary numbers have the form a i, complex numbers can be of the form a i + b, complex numbers have an imaginary as well as a real part, hence, both real and imaginary are a subset of complex numbers, it's definitely not a syntactical issue.
You lack quite a bit of humility, dude.

Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:50 pm 


Deathlike2
ZSNES Developer
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 6:47 am Posts: 6747

There's nothing bad about admitting wrong... but it's plenty fun to poke at it if you believe otherwise.
_________________ Continuing FF4 Research...

Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:28 am 


selmo2000
Rookie
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:19 am Posts: 19

_________________

Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:37 am 


gllt
NO VOWELS >:[
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:59 pm Posts: 753 Location: ALABAMA

its a witch
get in the lion

Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:55 am 


grinvader
ZSNES Shake Shake Prinny
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 4:15 pm Posts: 5621 Location: PAL50, dood !

Yeah, gonna skip that one.
_________________ 皆黙って俺について来い！！
Pantheon: Gideon Zhi  CaitSith2  Nach  kode54

Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:13 pm 


whicker
Trooper
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 4:33 am Posts: 479

ρ ρ FIGHT THE W/t
ρ ρ FIGHT THE W/t

Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:05 pm 

